Jump to content


The First Trump Impeachment Thread


Recommended Posts


5 minutes ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

 

The Ds had time for over 2 weeks vacation at the end of the inquiry.  Then Nancy dilly dallied for what seemed like a month after the vote.  That's a lot of time for the Courts to rule on these issues that would clearly be fastracked.  But I understand.  Nadler said they already had overwhelming proof, so we can ignore last minute attempts to reboot the trial.

Clinton trial allowed new witnesses and evidence 

Link to comment

1 minute ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

We're talking about the Obama admin's spying in an election TODAY?

You sound like a good cult member - pointing the finger elsewhere while being in denial about what your dear leader has done. 

Deception continues when you are unwilling to look into the mirror.   Wrong is wrong - stop excusing what trump has done today because you believe someone else did something wrong yesterday.  Morality/ethics doesn't work that way.

 

If you read all of my old posts from the Obama era, you'll see that I was far from being an Obama supporter.  I took a lot of flack (some warranted and some not) for my strong opinions about Obama's policies.  So no deflection of the issue at hand will work on me.  In retrospect and despite my policy differences, I would say that trump isn't worthy of holding Obama's jock strap.   

 

One day you might wake up and get out of the deception.  I pray that you do. 

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
14 minutes ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

 

The Ds had time for over 2 weeks vacation at the end of the inquiry.  Then Nancy dilly dallied for what seemed like a month after the vote.  That's a lot of time for the Courts to rule on these issues that would clearly be fastracked.  But I understand.  Nadler said they already had overwhelming proof, so we can ignore last minute attempts to reboot the trial.

So, in other words you don't care about hearing from people who can tell you first hand what happened....as long as keeping them quite keeps your guy in office.

Link to comment

That's the best part about Murkowski's statement: "I have come to the conclusion that there will be no fair trial in the Senate [because my party sets the rules]." But that is the mental gymnastics enablers must go through to acquit.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

We're talking about the Obama admin's spying in an election TODAY?

 

Cute. That's a pretty egregious claim, and if true a Trump administration backed by a GOP House and Senate and right leaning Supreme Court could have put Obama behind bars and forever tainted the Dems.  Could have packaged it with Trump's claim that there were 3 million fraudulent votes cast in the 2016 election, mostly by illegal immigrants for Hillary. Any smoke or fire behind those two, and the Democrats would be toast, right?

 

A more reasonable explanation is that the various U.S. intelligence agencies had all picked up the Russian chatter about influencing the U.S election, and combined with Donald Trump's proven entanglements with Russian oligarchs, and the clearly illegal activities of Trump's cohorts in Russia, President Obama was notified that U.S. agencies were watching Donald Trump as a Person of Interest. Whether there was collusion or not, the Republican candidate for President was in a position to be compromised. This is how bipartisan intelligence has operated forever. 

 

Obama had a lot of choices, including going public to hurt Trump. That would seem to be the prize for political spying, right?  Instead he has the administration stay mum throughout the election, believing any leak would be interpreted as a political trick to help Hillary, and might backfire. They were pretty convinced Hillary would win without it. 

 

What else you got today?

  • Plus1 5
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...